Posted
by
timothy
on Thursday February 09, 2012 @12:20PM
from the employment-wants-to-be-free dept.

stry_cat writes "My company has bought into the FUD and is going 100% Microsoft. Rather than work in this environment and be continuously at odds with upper management, I have decided to seek employment elsewhere. Where do I look for an open source job? I've started with the local paper's Sunday classifieds. I've looked on dice.com and monster.com. However almost all are Microsoft related. The few that aren't are some sort of dinky contract or temp job. So is there a place to find a job in an open source environment?"

You could always work as a contractor specializing in customizing software. Even companies that use FOSS often need someone to make custom modifications to said software to meet their specific needs. But I doubt you'll find many of those jobs posted in "Help Wanted" ads, and I'm not sure how many of them are actually out there or how you would find them.

And if you just want to avoid MS stuff on principle, you could always work as a Unix admin, Cobol programmer, Java developer, etc. depending on your skill set.

I would suggest you avoid Cobol programmer, though. I had to learn that godforsaken son-of-a-whore language in college and would rather eat glass while being raped by an angry Mike Tyson on top of a pyre of burning feces than to ever have to deal with it again. But some seem to find it a somewhat less suicide-inducing-please-god-give-me-the-strength-to-pull-this-trigger-and-end-it-all prospect than I.

Look for a mixed house. Very few companies even try to use one OS exclusively. At my current workplace, we have Solaris, Linux and Windows stacked floor to ceiling across more than an Acre of Data Center space. Within the environment, different people are recognized as experts on different platforms and expected to administer accordingly.

I.e. I am one of the Linux guys and I am in a department where everyone else is a Cisco or Firewall specialist. End result I do Linux 40 hours or more, each week, an

To the OP, this looks like one of the 'start your own business' projects. In particular, take the landscape of Open Source projects out there, identify the missing elements that potentially prevent them from becoming major winners (apart from marketing issues) and pick a few of them to work on. But before you do, try contacting those projects and let them know that you're willing to do certain things - such as writing drivers, bug fixes or whatever you think you can achieve - but for a fee, w/ terms & conditions to be agreed on b/w you. The problem w/ most FOSS projects is that people do the fun things in it, while not focussing on the less interesting parts, such as the bug fixes. Making a career out of those parts might be the best way to go. But make sure that you have people willing to buy into your results once you achieve them.

There's tons and tons of open-source jobs out there. One of the keywords here is "Android". The other keyword is "embedded". Linux and Android are being used for all kinds of embedded devices now, and there's tons of jobs for people using C and C++ (C more at the low levels, kernel, device drivers etc., C++ at the higher levels for applications). People who can work with and build embedded Linux systems are in high demand, and there's good demand for Qt C++ programmers too as that's being used a lot on these embedded devices that have touchscreens.

Now, this doesn't necessary mean you'll be doing a lot of contributions upstream to the open-source community, but you will be working with a lot of OSS components, and developing proprietary software that interacts with them. And you definitely won't be doing any work with MS technologies, as those have no place in an embedded system (there are some places using WinCE, but they're dying out and many are switching to Linux or Android).

There's tons and tons of open-source jobs out there. One of the keywords here is "Android". The other keyword is "embedded". Linux and Android are being used for all kinds of embedded devices now, and there's tons of jobs for people using C and C++ (C more at the low levels, kernel, device drivers etc., C++ at the higher levels for applications). People who can work with and build embedded Linux systems are in high demand, and there's good demand for Qt C++ programmers too as that's being used a lot on these embedded devices that have touchscreens.

Now, this doesn't necessary mean you'll be doing a lot of contributions upstream to the open-source community, but you will be working with a lot of OSS components, and developing proprietary software that interacts with them. And you definitely won't be doing any work with MS technologies, as those have no place in an embedded system (there are some places using WinCE, but they're dying out and many are switching to Linux or Android).

Your options are good ones, and so is going to work for academia, National Labs and other government agencies like NIST, NASA, etc. All use open source extensively with Microsoft and Apple all in the same bag. It's a fun environment if you get the right management and people around you. The nice thing about academia in particular is that it is relatively easy to move from department to department, college to college, or to any central IT unit if you find yourself in an unpleasant situation due to personalities, changes in management, etc. Most of my open source experience comes from working in academia for almost 20 years, supporting and managing software development and IT resources. It's one of the best places to experiment and contribute to some exciting projects using open source, closed source, crowd sourced (hehe!) IT tools and research projects, depending on where you might end up. Good luck!

I can't remember where I read it, but there was an article about how you can't make software too easy to use and install. That would not leave much work for the consultants and IT folks, and they would thus not push the product to their clients.

You need that right balance between having a good product and leaving enough work for the IT workers to really get that into the market.

Now, that changes a bit with 'the cloud' to some extent as now the goal the software creator can deliver and charge for the service directly. They don't need the IT consultants as much to 'push' their product.

This is one the bigger reasons for MS dominating the general PC environment including the office. They leave their products with boatloads of customizability and scripting and push the IT folks and consultants with training to build out that ecosystem all tied to their platform of course.

Open source environment typically lack this push. To emphasize again... this is not an engineer or technical push. There are generally equivalent open source projects... but a business and marketing and ecosystem push.

Even something as simple as how to develop for 'Windows'... it is easy for anyone to start... get Visual Studio is the answer.

This is why you typically find far fewer custom FOSS shops. Most companies I've seen want to use FOSS as a replacement. They don't want to/think to do the kind of customization you can often do with Windows for desktop apps.

So where are the open source jobs?Generally you can find Linux development jobs in embedded systems. But if you have worked for a 'Microsoft Shop', I'm guessing this is not your niche.

You could also go with Java, and many corporations and banks use Java.

Many 'cloud' based solution typically have FOSS backends... as again... no need to have consultants push the solution.

But in the end, they are just different models. I've never had the kind of anti MS passion many people have.

You're a douche. In an economy where many people have been unemployed for so long that they're just dropping out of the workforce altogether, you're fretting over "FUD" because your company did a normal thing and switched products? Get over it. Do you realize how insane you have to be to take platform wars so seriously that you actually quit your job and avoid any other jobs that have anything to do with Microsoft products? For god's sake, get some perspective.

Platform switches tend to shake out people. There is nothing at all surprising or shocking about this. If he doesn't want to deal with Microsoft crap in his day job, there are plenty of places that are Unix shops. Plenty of places that use Unix also use Linux. All you have to do is search in the places you would usually search.

Between the lines, I read that this guy's a douche who doesn't know how to do anything out of his comfort zone. So fucking what that they chose microsoft? It's their decision to make. Every platform has pros and cons. And even if it didn't -- is it his job to chose the platform? Obviously not. So who fucking cares? And what the fuck is "bought into the FUD" supposed to mean?

"Oh no. My management made a platform decision that I don't like. I quit." Then fucking quit you idiot. Go start your own company founded on whatever principles you want and make your own platform decisions then.

If you had to explain to family why you quit your job, do you realize how fucking retarded it sounds to say "I quit because of principles. I refuse to work for a company that buys from Microsoft"

Good for you that you have principles -- but those are fucking stupid principle. Set your priorities. Jeebus Christ this is idiotic.

"Oh no. My management made a platform decision that I don't like. I quit." Then fucking quit you idiot. Go start your own company founded on whatever principles you want and make your own platform decisions then.

He did quit. Why does he have to start his own company when he could work at an existing company that embraces his ideals? Not everyone wants to run their own company, nor should they.

If you had to explain to family why you quit your job, do you realize how fucking retarded it sounds to say "I quit because of principles. I refuse to work for a company that buys from Microsoft"

Good for you that you have principles -- but those are fucking stupid principle. Set your priorities. Jeebus Christ this is idiotic.

There are companies that would embrace him and his ideals. He just doesn't work at one, and judging the fact that he's looking in the newspaper for a new job and not Craigslist, he probably doesn't live in an area where he's likely to find a company that's runs significantly on open source software. Just because you have no ideals surrounding open source, that doesn't mean that no one else should. As for what he tells his family, that's none of your concern - his wife may be a hardcore OSX geek and completely understand.

That said, he's going to run into Microsoft at just about every company in the back office, but there are plenty of companies that use Open Source products for their public facing web sites and in-house tools. For some things, Microsoft is the Right Answer, it's just that MS comes with a lot of baggage and the foot print starts to grow and before you know it, you've got your entire infrastructure on MS and there's so much momentum behind it, it's hard to move off. SaaS is making it easier to not grow a large MS infrastructure to run your business, but even SaaS providers often come with Microsoft dependencies either with MS-only thick clients, or MSIE requirements for full functionality.

Woohoo, what is it today, a generalization day? People have drives and ambitions. I'd much rather someone who is outspoken and has a passion, than someone who will just nod at the meetings, but wish he was doing other things.

No company will hire this guy or anyone else that is going to quit because of selection of software.

It shows that he's not reliable and maybe a flake. What next, he'll get hired at another company and quit because they're switching to Oracle?!

If you're that much of a zealot that you'll quit because your company isn't using FOSS, then you really need to get a fucking life.

I can't speak for other areas, but there are plenty of places in the SF Bay Area that will hire you (or not) based on your support of FOSS - bonus points if you can point out actual contributions to FOSS software. Many of these places were started by and run by people who also embrace FOSS software. Tell them that you can only work on a Windows desktop and the interview will end quickly.

Granted, he's probably not going to get a job at a large fortune 500 (or even fortune 1000 company), but there are small companies and startups that embrace open source since it was FOSS software that helped them get their company off the ground at little cost.

Me? I'm somewhere in the middle - I prefer FOSS solutions, but will use the right tool for the job. I work with (and sometimes manage) Linux, Microsoft, and Apple zealots, and you know what? They all have valid points about their preferred platform - I don't expect our PHP developers to code a.Net sharepoint interface, nor do I expect our SQL/Server Admin to set up MySQL replication. Of course, I don't expect our SQL/Server admin to design a web page because that's not what he's paid for and that's not his core strength.

If you're that much of a zealot that you'll quit because your company isn't using FOSS, then you really need to get a fucking life.

Of course, some would say that if you're willing to whore yourself out to whatever technology your company deems appropriate, you need to get some balls and take control of your life. If you don't want to be a.Net programmer and you have the skills to get another job doing what you want, why shouldn't you?

If you had to explain to family why you quit your job, do you realize how fucking retarded it sounds to say "I quit because of principles. I refuse to work for a company that buys from Microsoft"

I wouldn't father children with a woman who doesn't fucking pay attention, and doesn't extrapolate, to begin with. But hey that's just me. Apparently this is more about you and your family or something?

Every platform has pros and cons

So do political systems. You could say that about everything, it's just sophistry filler. Would you say the same to someone in 1940s Germany quitting their job for the Nazi party? "oh, but everything has pros and cons *scratches beard in a wise manner*". Well, so does having priorities other than you, for example.

Now feel free to go nuts over me making that comparison, but you basically say food over principles, and I say that doesn't leave much food in the long run to be used for anything worth a damn. Everybody dies anyway, see heat death of the universe. It's how we spend the time is what makes the only difference. Nobody surives, no memories survive, everything is irrelevant and dust. What matters is wether your soul soars or is tethered to the fears of mediocre people and blind, doomed materialism. That is all there is. But I digress.

Then fucking quit you idiot. Go start your own company founded on whatever principles you want and make your own platform decisions then.

Oh, and maybe ask slashdot for pointers? What exactly is your problem then?

People should be forced to work in their position regardless of the practical and moral personal guidelines they may have. And if they decide not too, we can use guilt and shame to persuade them otherwise...don't forget to mention the torment they will be putting their family through.

If that doesn't work, you blackmail them into staying by threatening their ability to gain future employment elsewhere. One of my personal favorites is the "do-not-poach" agreement I have with several other related (and non-related) industries. Collectively, we maintain a registry that we put these rejects with "principals" into...slavery...err...(cheap) employment then becomes quite easy. I have even been able to issue paycuts and salary reductions to those individuals that I have caught on Monster and Craigslist...

I am on board with you 100%. It is time that we as employers stood up to these bullies, who always demand better pay and health insurance, and put them in their place. They work for us at our leisure. If I call programmer X at 3am because I want a new programmable interface for my coffee-pot that allows per-day timer functionality, he better have it done by 8am and he can forget about extra-pay, overtime, or and type of bonus...he should be glad I didn't fire him on the spot for the hesitation I heard when I told him to do it. I don't care if his wife is currently in labor and about to deliver...how the hell is he going to support a child if he doesn't have a job.

That brings me to healthcare. Our efforts at lobbying and media-manipulation have not been as successful as we have hoped. Within 3-years, employees will be able to decouple their insurance plans from their employment. This has often been the primary tool that we us to keep these people in-line and their salaries capped. We need to implement more public disdain for ObamaCare...maybe leak plans for those that take early retirement to include mandatory enrollment at age 85 to a nursing facility...we can call these "death-camps". Imply that participation will result in them killing their grand-parents. We should be able to gain a few more years of enslavement security or maybe even repealment of the bill.

However, our efforts in deunionization are finally taking hold. With any luck, we will be able to reinstitute mandatory 7-day work-weeks (at reduced pay) by the end of the fiscal year.

With your help, I am sure that we can reduce further occurrences of these idiotic people jumping ship every time we make decision they claim is irrational. I find it refreshing find such a like-minded ally, thank-you.

Actually, he said he would seek employment elsewhere. That doesn't mean just up and quit, that usually means you keep working, and send out resumes, take a few days off to interview. That sort of thing. Normal shit that any professional should be doing from time to time anyway, unless he is at a place that he intends to make a career and stay for the retirement package.

Its the best way to make more money and....if the company is going in a direction that you don't want to go...by all means...why not leave?

Even if you like, or dislike, a given technology you can work with it. For example I hate Macs, their enterprise support is shit. However, we have some faculty that use them, so I support them. I've worked out how to integrate them in to our system. I feel we would be better without them, and I'll advocate that, but I'm not a dick about it and I'll work with them.

Just curious. What if you given an edict that all all new desktop and laptop purchases would be Macs? And, oh, since all the desktops are going to be Macs, you're going to have run OS X server and get rid of AD or whatever you use.

And this happened in spite of your strong objections and the fact that you probably are more knowledgeable about the subject than those who made the decision?

My guess is that at minimum you'd be pretty pissed and feel completely undervalued.

They'll work. "Quite well" is open to interpretation. I'm not anti-Mac. I'm posting from one now.

My point is that there are aspects to most people's jobs that they don't like but they're willing to put up with. So if you're somebody who doesn't feel that Macs (or whatever) are the best choice, it's one thing to support a few of them, but quite another if the entire company is going to switch over. Especially if you think it's a bad decision, you made your opinion known, and felt you were ignored.

I'm an IT Manager. If I decided that we were going 100% Mac (even just on the desktop), my network admin would definitely voice his displeasure. If I decided to go ahead anyway, it would not surprise me in the least if he quit. He might decide to stay anyway but our working relationship would suffer, at least for awhile. His job performance may also decline.

Some times it's best if an employee and an employer part ways. It's far better for the OP to look for a job he likes than to stay and be a unhappy, crappy employee.

Actually, it sounds more like someone else is being the preachy douche. These days, you don't get a business advantage by letting your IBM (or Microsoft) rep run your IT department. Most shops may be primarily Microsoft (or more rarely, primarily open-source), but most successful shops realize that no one solution exists for everything, and thus have little pockets of alternative solutions.

When you flat-out slam the door on alternatives, you also slam the door on opportunities. Better to bail before things get worse.

Right. I'm not sure if this person actually quit, but irrational decisions like this, in the end, always lead to a disaster. Also, they didn't necessarily switch to MS because of FUD, but maybe because there're advantages, since MS products are better integrated... I used to be a big proponent of open source, but not so much any more.

It doesn't have to be irrational. Au contraire, to me it seems like a perfectly rational decision. The guy is not happy at the job, is it irrational to quit because of that? Happiness or lack thereof is a fact, you don't have to rationalize it for it to be true. People have tastes, wishes, desires, none of this stuff is necessarily driven by rational thought.

stry_cat sounds highly principled and I for one applaud him for it. It's not an easy step to take but it certainly can be the right one. If I were stry_cat I would look to get the new job sorted before quitting the old one, of course. Hopefully that's what they're doing.

As to the question of where to look, why not start with the big players? RedHat, Canonical, IBM, Google all (clearly) make serious use of open source technologies. Outside of pure IT there are plenty of others who do the same: Amazon, eBay,

His employer switched to a platform he does not have enough knowledge with. He should find a job he can do ASAP. This is normal, happens all the time. I am a linux/unix sysadmin, I do some windows work as well, but I would never take a job were that was my main focus. It is outside my field of expertise, nor do I want to do that job. I will not take a job flipping burgers or digging ditches either.

The economy has nothing to do with it, I am getting 2+ recruiters calling me everyday for the past week. What your skills are matter far more than the economy.

Personally, if my employer switched to something I didn't have experience with I'd take it as an excuse to gain experience with something new while getting paid for it, rather than going "wha wha wha, must find a new job and limit my skill set even more".

I don't know what sort of company you work for, but I've never ever heard of anyone being demoted from Senior X to Junior X without changing jobs. The fact is, if your company switches tech to something you're not familiar with then it's time to learn something new while being paid! That makes the most sense in the short term (you keep your job) and it makes sense in the long term (you have new expertise that will make you more employable). It's a win-win as far as I'm concerned.

How are you going to become the "Jr" guy? Just because you are learning a new platform / software / server environment, doesn't mean it replaces your knowledge of the previous framework. Also, someone has to perform the integration, someone has to migrate data, someone has to validate the functionality requirements of the new installs. There is a hell of alot that has to be done in these situations, meanwhile you can learn the new shit and be able to say in the next interview "I am a SR Sys Admin for X syst

I can now bill myself as both an Android developer and also an iOS developer.

More importantly, as both platforms rise in popularity, any serious employer is going to be looking for a developer who does not one or the other but both. If you had bailed as soon as your company started developing for iOS/Android, you would have found yourself in a difficult position where your skillset did not meet market demand.

Suppose, like a couple of people I know, you had in-depth knowledge of an ERP system that is still in current use and likely to stay that way, and your employer decided to switch to a Microsoft product in the belief that now MCSEs would be able to do the work?

You know who is going to be blamed when it all goes pear shaped. You have 10 years of experience in a mainframe product. Do you:

Stick around, work 80 hour weeks for the same pay and wait to be fired?

Leave and become a well paid contractor until a company you contract for makes you an unrefusable offer?

Some of the people posting here obviously think that changing architectures is just a five minute job. Perhaps, given the relatively simple applications on offer, that's the case for phones or tablets (I doubt it, in reality). But, say, a switch from SAP/Oracle to Dynamics for a senior developer? Not so simple.

Exactly. As others have pointed out, there's a lot of information we just don't have.

* What does this guy do? I'm assuming something like a server admin, given the vehement reaction, but he could just as well be a network admin who really doesn't like Microsoft, for all I know.* What's with the company? I'm assuming they're quite small, or they wouldn't be able to do a 100% MS shop. How big a transition is this for them? Have they been all Linux before? Why the shift?* More to the point, they either have no

At my last job our team had 6 developers, 4 of us used Linux on a daily basis. The company decided it was going all Windows, we were able to hold out a while but the Linux portions of the environment were getting more and more marginalized.

We all had the option of moving over to the MS side, but frankly if we wanted to work with MS there were better options, and within a year all 4 of us were gone.

A job should be something you enjoy, and if you have the ability to find enjoyment in the tools you use that counts for a lot.

As for those complaining about him looking for a new job while everyone else is struggling with unemployment... Well I hear there's about to be an opening for someone willing to work with Windows.

The submitter didn't say "he does not have enough knowledge with" Microsoft products.

What the submitter said was:

My company has bought into the FUD and is going 100% Microsoft. Rather than work in this environment and be continuously at odds with upper management, I have decided to seek employment elsewhere.

The submitter literally states that he is going to leave his job solely because he doesn't want to work with Microsoft products. He says nothing about not having the knowledge and skill needed. His decision is based solely on management choosing MS over a FLOSS solution.

You are not just assuming things, you are putting words in other people's mouths.

they could be a shop where as of now the Microsoft method is Preferred (but they will use FLOSS when needed)ora shop where if FLOSS is required to do something IT WILL NOT GET DONEora shop where you will get escorted from the building by security for having FLOSS stuff on your person/computer

+1
At least the company benefited by getting a fanatic of their backs. Can't people just use whatever software fits their needs? I understand people who reject things like the iPhone and WP7 because such platforms may prohibit them from loading software they want (see the Google Voice fiasco in iOS for more info), and they may not feel OK by having others decide for them even though they are the ones who pay for the device, but rejecting a piece of software because the author didn't chose to donate (yes, d

Um, isn't that why he quit? They decided to go "100%" MS, which means they are no longer going to evaluate the software and find the right solution, they will just pick MS. He didn't say they replaced Postgres with Access, or that they want people to use IE instead of Chrome. He said that they just BANNED all non-Microsoft software.

So no, at his current job, he cannot use whatever software fits his needs. That's why he wants a new job.

Well, for one it sounds like he's still employed, if he had just rage quit that would be different. If you don't want to be a Microsoft admin, why stay in an all-Microsoft shop? As long as you feel the new job is as secure as the old one - which may be very low - there's nothing wrong with moving sideways as long as you've got the new job lined up before you leave your old one. He's just not finding the jobs he expected. As he said open source and not Linux servers, I'm guessing he's a developer. And his pr

You're a douche. In an economy where many people have been unemployed for so long that they're just dropping out of the workforce altogether, you're fretting over "FUD" because your company did a normal thing and switched products? Get over it. Do you realize how insane you have to be to take platform wars so seriously that you actually quit your job and avoid any other jobs that have anything to do with Microsoft products? For god's sake, get some perspective.

You make a good troll, but the point is right on. Is MS stuff really so hard to wrap your head around that you had to pull the ripcord? If you are right that MS products in general are harder to maintain, then guess what THAT IS THE BUSINESS TO BE IN. Think about this, Mr. I'm So Fucking Smart, if you are right that FOSS products are a dream come true and they work as soon as the key is turned, you are going to have a pretty damn hard time convincing someone to bother keeping you on the payroll. Get an in-demand skill (some of them are in FOSS, most are not) and stick with it. If you are set on being a sysadmin type person, you either need to know old school unix (for those companies still kicking their legacy systems down the road) or you need to know MS (for any modern company of decent size.) That's just the way the world is spinning right now.

I don't know what kind of work you do but I for sure would seek other employment if I was asked to do a wholesale move of the systems I work on to Windows. I'd also find other work if my employer told me the only work they had for me next month was mopping the floors.

It isn't beneath me to mop the floor. If they need me to do that *today*, I will. But janitorial work won't move my career in the direction I wish to go so if that's the core work they have for me, it's time to move on.

I feel the same way about managing and/or writing code for Windows systems.

I have issues of those Open Source Zealots who accuse everyone who made a conscious decision to drop Open Source and go with Widows as believing the FUD. The way a product is licensed has little if anything to do with its product quality. Linux is a great OS. But it isn't perfect Windows is better then Linux in a lot of Areas... Also Linux is better then Windows in a lot of areas.

Why Windows?1. Office comparability... Oddly enough when you are working with other businesses they prefer to get Office Compatible documents. LibreOffice does a great job at office compatibility however it is 99% compatible, so 3 times a year you have an issue and you need to look like your company is to cheap to buy software that the rest of the industry uses.

2. Human Resources... You can find a lot of people who are Skilled in Windows and Open Source Tools, You can find people skilled in Windows only, and you can find people skilled in Open Source Only... However there are a lot more windows skilled people so if they are hiring they want to get a wider market to choose from.

3. Third Party Software... Often Business will buy those expensive enterprise systems that every employee hates. However they do do their job and make the business runs more effetiently. They have been tested to work in Windows and there are not to many Open Source tools that do that. The debate of if these Enterprise Systems are more valuable then if you get a custom program is an other debate.

Having a job in this economy is something to be thankful for. Still, you spend much of your waking hours at work and you'll be a much happier person if you enjoy your job.

If he can find work he likes better, - for whatever reason, why shouldn't he switch?

I've left a job because I didn't find it challenging enough. I left another one because I didn't like the way they ran their projects and I wasn't in a position to change it. An important aspect of any job I take is that the company or organization be one that benefits society in some way. I tend to end up at non-profits. So I'm kind of picky. Luckily there's been enough opportunities that I can afford to be.

When I'm hiring I look for someone who's going to be enthusiastic about the position and the company. If he's at odds with management, they are both better off if he goes some place else.

Nonsense, of course. What he is...is a professional. Professionals do sit idly by while inferior
people make extremely stupid decisions -- of which "going Microsoft" is most assuredly one. They utilize
their best professional judgment, they protest, they complain, they argue, they do everything that they can
to argue their case. And if they fail? Then they resign in protest, as this person has. (And were I hiring:
I would hire this one in a minute. Most people are simply too weak to demonstrate this kind
of courage, to put their own job on the line.)

The people who most deserve our admiration are not the ones who meekly go along with incompetence
and short-sightedness and stupidity; no, they're the ones who stand up to it. And in a week where we
learned of the death of Roger Boisjoly [latimes.com], a man who did that very thing, maybe we should remind ourselves that if we really want
to call ourselves professionals -- and not cheap whores who will do anything for a paycheck -- then we are REQUIRED to
stand up for our principles. Anyone who can't or won't do that is a spineless, worthless coward.

People should work on things they enjoy. The various technologies out there are so close to equivalent that it's more a matter of what you and your team (including partner companies, etc.) are familiar with and personal aesthetics than any real technical advantage--WIMP/LAMP/C#+MSSQL/Python+Oracle, there's really very little difference in what you can accomplish.

But, I have a personal aversion to Python. I just don't like semantic whitespace--maybe

Hi! Skilled people can find jobs. If you can't find one, it's because you suck, you're not trying or you have unreasonable expectations.

Have a nice day.

Nice post. Asshole.

Except that he's absolutely right. This guy quit his job because they are switching to MS products. If he was any good he could learn the new system and continue his work, however he has decided to quit and come appeal to Slashdot's anti-MS mentality. He has unreasonable expectations and probably lacks the skillset to do the new job. He didn't even try.

Working with MS server-side stuff is a gigantic PITA and it's understandable that you might leave a job to avoid it. It's like switching from managing a team of educated adults to babysitting a bunch of brat children. I'd do the same thing in his shoes.

The reason for the "fragmentation" is that Linux programs tend to use global dependencies, instead of carrying all of their dependencies with them. It obviously has some (possibly major) disadvantages (DLL hell), but it's the reason Linux tends to use 5x less memory than Windows and OSX.

Only source I know of outside the rare internal position is as a consultant being hired piecemeal to make modifications to existing open source software. Basically company A saying we want to use software B because its free (aka open) but we want it to do Y so hire X to make the changes. Dont know that you can make a carrier out of it, especially if you refuse to bid on non-open source jobs.

He/she doesn't have to try to do this on his own but seek employment with a consulting company that does. stry_cat, pick an open-source package you like and do a Google search to find companies that support that package. Then you can use LinkedIn to contact people inside that company to see if they are hiring.

Alternatively, you can contact IBM, Red Hat, Apple(?) or someone like that which works for money in the open-source arena.

Are you looking for a company developing something, which is to be released under an open source licence?

Or to support open source platforms, irrespective of what the company itself does?

Are you looking for employment, rather than offering consultancy services / self-employed? If you have expertise with particular open source platforms, are there jobs available to work with those platforms — even if the companies in question do not realise that they are open source?

Could you be looking for jobs where the company wants a solution which does [x], and is not worried how you get to [x] as long as you are on time and on budget, and so would be amenable to an open source solution?

Exactly. I've never seen a open source job advertised. On the other hand, I fairly regularly get sent adverts from people looking for a FreeBSD or LLVM developer, and there are lots of jobs around for Linux or *BSD admins. Looking for an open source job makes even less sense than looking for a 'Microsoft job' (which, actually, sounds like a euphemism).

Personally, I've been doing ruby on rails development for about four years now, and I haven't had to touch proprietary code in as many years. Development platform is linux or OSX, and 100% the software stack is open source.

This is just my personal anecdote, but I think you'll have success working on open source if you find an open source platform that's actually used by your company. (Duh, I know right?)

Pretty hard to find. Microsofts tentacles are everywhere and even the shops that are as much open source as possible, get infected somehow. We're pretty much a Debian shop, but accounting needed a Windows 2008 server for their proprietary accounting package and left and right there were supporting servers for little tasks where it was best suited. However, now developers are requesting a MSSQL server for a real production platform. Why? I don't know... Doesn't make much sense.

One where you won't get the death penalty for drug trafficking, where you don't have to get a permit to protest, where you won't get your ass fined off for minor littering, and where there is freedom of religion for starters?

Call it "the cloud", call it "software as a service" or call it "managed services" -- or just call it "running a web site". Companies that run services tend to use a lot of OSS.

You'd be *using* OSS software (Apache, memcached, Google Java libs, MySQL, all that kind of thing), and you'd be likely to be adapting it. Depending on the company, you might have to fight a bit if you want to contribute back to the OSS projects in a significant way.

the same kernel and userland work on both super computers, cellphones, and everything in between. there is not a computing solution that can't be made to work with gnu/linux.(not that its always the best solution. Also, your company's accounting software would run just fine on linux if someone ported it for linux. Its not because of any flaw of lack of capability, but choices made by your accounting software's developer. At least from a techincal standpoint, when you are doing development work, and control all the code, yes, linux is far more flexable than most any other operating system., to include UNIX, which as very flexable and very portable itself.

While that is indeed flexible, it's completely irrelevant to me when I need to buy a new server. I don't really care whether or not my server operating system can run on a phone, I'm more interested in whether or not it can run the applications I need and how much it will cost to install and maintain.

Inexperienced: Anyone with more than entry-level experience in their work would at least have some idea of competing companies in their industry and would also have some notions about how to contact those companies to ask about jobs whether advertised or not. They would also know that, when asking for help from complete strangers, being as clear and detailed as possibl

Bad joke in the subject, but it's true. I've found that submitting patches to a established open source project is the easiest way to find a job, in fact without moving a finger.

Starting a decent open source program is even better. My pet project ccextractor is a very niche things yet I get offers for customizations / deployment / etc very often (to me often here is something like twice a month).

now, convincing companies to run linux on the desktop is hard. it does help that we have an old UNIX guru at work as the "master hacker" and computer cult cheiftan. Being that linux is probably the most flexible, powerful, and usable of all modern day *NIX systems.(runs on more systems than netbsd)

I work in a large but otherwise nameless company. They picked up "linux" on my resume, gave me and interveiw and hired me without any real certs based on my linux knowledge.

The Mozilla Foundation is hiring. They even have a billboard on 101 near San Francisco: "Work for mankind, not for the man".

Most of the hosting, "cloud", data mining, and data warehousing industry is Linux based. The infrastructures of the big players like Google and Facebook are all Linux.
Once you get off the desktop, Microsoft isn't dominant.

...most of the times, it's the Open Source job that will look for you. Create or join interesting projects. Let you skills shine. If you're good, someone will ask you if you're interested in applying for a job with them.

There are a lot of "open source" jobs out there, whether you mean working with open source products like Linux or PHP or Android OS, or working for a company that is an open source provider like Red Hat or Google, and the article is nothing but a troll. Mr. stry_cat completely neglected to give so much as a hint about his technical skill set, let alone enumerate anything specific. There are programming, admin, project management, and management positions in all parts of the country, across almost every industry imaginable, and the only constraints for any given individual are personal preferences as to where to live, and current responsibilities for where they are currently located.

Every time a slashdot editor allows a completely worthless article like this to hit the front page, they are devaluing slashdot as a brand. Given how often timothy does this, I am amazed he is still permitted the opportunity to do so.

I've seen tons of Drupal, HTML 5, jQuery and jQuery Mobile job openings (those are all "open source" if you will).

It also seems that at least in the past few weeks the number of job hunters that have been contacting myself and co-workers has increased, which is hopefully a good sign for my unemployed brother and sister college grads...

I have some serious reservations about responding to this, but so many red lights go off:-What employer would hire someone who makes rash decisions based on emotion? You're not Steve Jobs.-Considering the number of Fortune 500 companies that use Microsoft technology, I can tell you the decision upper management has taken is not just on FUD. Just as a way to put a check on your assumptions, revisit the company you have left in five years. Are they still in business? Did they grow? My guess is that moving to Microsoft was a business decision as much as a technology decision. There are pros and cons to all these vendors and ideologies. You want to stake your paycheque on it, don't blame the industry or others.-The biggest error I see here is, regardless of why you wanted to leave...you were getting a paycheque. Storming off without securing your next employment hurts nobody but yourself. Unless you are in a position where you are being abused, taken advantage of, subjected to unsafe working conditions...why would you leave first? Being unemployed makes you that much more undesirable to any potential employer.-Sunday classifieds? What are you, some sort of dinosaur? Even my non-technology friends do not "start" with the classifieds.

I'll just end with my personal feeling that perhaps you are the one who is under the influence of FUD. I've worked in Linux shops, shops with various Unix flavours HPUX/AIX/Solaris (even SCO back in the day when they weren't just patent trolls,) Apple and Microsoft shops. As technologists, we're pretty adaptable. I'd never take my personal preferences on vendors as the limiting factor on choice of employment.

Things can change year to year. One year our company was using Black Berry Phones with a Black Berry Server, and the next year we got rid of all BB phones and the server in favor of iPhones and Android. If you're not willing to adapt to changes, then you don't deserve to be in IT. Don't get me wrong, I like Open Source, but I'm not going to risk my job because I refuse to work with Microsoft Products, that's just stupid.

...that your company is probably better off without you whinging about how Bill Gates and Darth Vader have the same accountant, if you want to have 100% control over your technology stack, start your own business or become a freelance consultant. That way you'll be free to pick and choose what you work on.

Of course, the kind of person who would quit their job because they're scared of Microsoft probably doesn't have the right temperament to run a successful business.

First, put together a resume of your marketable skills. Then contact recruiters in the region you would like to work in (they can often be found via LinkedIn, careerbuilder, etc.). Research potential employers. Do not go into interviews to discuss "open source" or your philosophy, go in with the intention of leveraging your skills to deliver real value to the organization.

"Open Source" covers a lot of area. Are you a C/C++/Java/Whatever language-de-jour developer, a system administrator, a web developer, a network engineer,... ?

I've been everything from a developer to a sysadmin, an engineer to an architect. While I have worked in environments heavily biased toward Linux and Open Source (management burned by too many orphaned 3rd party libraries and apps), in my experience most environments are heterogenous, and will have some combination of Windows & Linux Desktops, Linux and Solaris servers, with a smattering of Windows servers. One environment I've worked in was heavily biased toward Windows on the server side, and while they lived to regret it, they did not change direction as a result. The reality is you cannot dictate platforms, and your recommendations should be driven by value to the business, not personal bias or philosophy, however galling you may at times find that to be.

I work for a C# / Microsoft shop. Previously I worked for a PHP shop (developed on Mac but hosted on Linux). I gotta tell you... I understand wanting to leave a Microsoft shop. There are just so many unnecessary daily annoyances that come from Microsoft software. But... in my case... the owner/boss of the PHP shop was an a$$h0l3. The Microsoft shop I work for now is ran by really nice people and treats us great. I'm probably going to stay a very long time.

Please, don't get me wrong, I'm not crediting Microsoft for the goodness of my current employer or blaming PHP for the last one. I'm just saying that platform IS important but it's not the MOST important thing in a computer job. If your current employer (you didn't leave yet right?) are good people then I would recommend staying. At least be very cautious before switching. Make very sure you won't regret it.